Eshita Singh1, Marc Schecter1, Christopher Towe1, Raheel Rizwan2, Bryant Roosevelt2, James Tweddell2, M Monir Hossain3, David Morales2, Farhan Zafar4. 1. Department of Pediatric Pulmonology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. 2. Department of Pediatric Cardiothoracic Surgery, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. 3. Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. 4. Department of Pediatric Cardiothoracic Surgery, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. Electronic address: farhan.zafar@cchmc.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lung donor utilization rates remain low, with many organs refused for donor quality. However, some centers have successfully transplanted these organs despite multiple refusals for donor quality (RDQs) by other centers. We hypothesized that the number of refusals due to donor quality does not impact post-transplant outcomes. METHODS: Lung transplants (LTxs) from 2006 to 2015, identified using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database, were matched against the potential transplant recipient (PTR) data set by donor identification. Transplants were categorized into 2 groups: low RDQ (0 to 3 RDQs) and high RDQ (>3 RDQs). Post-transplant survival and predictors for high RDQ were observed using Kaplan‒Meier and logistic regression analyses, respectively. RESULTS: Of 10,126 adult (>18 years) LTxs, 77% had at least 1 RDQ, with a median of 4 RDQs. Post-transplant 1-year survival was similar for both the low and high RDQ groups (p = 0.49). Furthermore, groups of recipients who received donors with an increasing number of RDQs (>3, >6, or >10) also had similar post-transplant 1-year survival (p = 0.77). Treatment for rejection within 1 year and intubation at 72 hours post-transplant were higher in the high RDQ group (p < 0.01). An inverse relationship was identified between the number of RDQs and likelihood of utilization. After 10 RDQs, the likelihood of utilization varied significantly by donor characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Lung transplant survival is not associated with number of refusals due to donor quality. When determining whether an organ is suitable for transplant, the number of refusals due to donor quality should not influence one's decision, especially in this era of limited donor supply.
BACKGROUND: Lung donor utilization rates remain low, with many organs refused for donor quality. However, some centers have successfully transplanted these organs despite multiple refusals for donor quality (RDQs) by other centers. We hypothesized that the number of refusals due to donor quality does not impact post-transplant outcomes. METHODS: Lung transplants (LTxs) from 2006 to 2015, identified using the United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) database, were matched against the potential transplant recipient (PTR) data set by donor identification. Transplants were categorized into 2 groups: low RDQ (0 to 3 RDQs) and high RDQ (>3 RDQs). Post-transplant survival and predictors for high RDQ were observed using Kaplan‒Meier and logistic regression analyses, respectively. RESULTS: Of 10,126 adult (>18 years) LTxs, 77% had at least 1 RDQ, with a median of 4 RDQs. Post-transplant 1-year survival was similar for both the low and high RDQ groups (p = 0.49). Furthermore, groups of recipients who received donors with an increasing number of RDQs (>3, >6, or >10) also had similar post-transplant 1-year survival (p = 0.77). Treatment for rejection within 1 year and intubation at 72 hours post-transplant were higher in the high RDQ group (p < 0.01). An inverse relationship was identified between the number of RDQs and likelihood of utilization. After 10 RDQs, the likelihood of utilization varied significantly by donor characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Lung transplant survival is not associated with number of refusals due to donor quality. When determining whether an organ is suitable for transplant, the number of refusals due to donor quality should not influence one's decision, especially in this era of limited donor supply.
Authors: Caroline Meers; Dirk Van Raemdonck; Geert M Verleden; Willy Coosemans; Herbert Decaluwe; Paul De Leyn; Philippe Nafteux; Toni Lerut Journal: Transpl Int Date: 2010-01-05 Impact factor: 3.782
Authors: Marc Hartert; Omer Senbaklavacin; Bernhard Gohrbandt; Berthold M Fischer; Roland Buhl; Christian-Friedrich Vahld Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2014-02-14 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: E Gabbay; T J Williams; A P Griffiths; L M Macfarlane; T C Kotsimbos; D S Esmore; G I Snell Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 1999-07 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: M Valapour; M A Skeans; J M Smith; L B Edwards; W S Cherikh; K Uccellini; A K Israni; J J Snyder; B L Kasiske Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Mark J Russo; Ryan R Davies; Kimberly N Hong; Alexander Iribarne; Steven Kawut; Matthew Bacchetta; Frank D'Ovidio; Selim Arcasoy; Joshua R Sonett Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: M R Baldwin; E R Peterson; I Easthausen; I Quintanilla; E Colago; J R Sonett; F D'Ovidio; J Costa; J M Diamond; J D Christie; S M Arcasoy; D J Lederer Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2013-08-26 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: J M A Smits; B J A Mertens; H C Van Houwelingen; A Haverich; G G Persijn; G Laufer Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2003-11 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Michael O Harhay; Raphaël Porcher; Gabriel Thabut; Michael J Crowther; Thomas DiSanto; Samantha Rubin; Zachary Penfil; Zhou Bing; Jason D Christie; Joshua M Diamond; Edward Cantu Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2019-03
Authors: Max T Buchko; Nasim Boroumand; Jeffrey C Cheng; Alim Hirji; Kieran Halloran; Darren H Freed; Jayan Nagendran Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2020-11-13 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Ann E Woolley; Laura M Piechura; Hilary J Goldberg; Steve K Singh; Antonio Coppolino; Lindsey R Baden; Hari R Mallidi Journal: Ann Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2020-01